FROM: Sturgess, Frances Coulter
TO:[log in to unmask]
CC:[log in to unmask]
SUBJECT: brfdg in the military
DATE: 02-20-97   12:45 EST
PRIORITY:


I look forward to seeing followup on the article in the Feb 24 Time regarding
the plight of Lt. Cuevas and her lawsuit regarding the ability to breastfeed
her infant and still remain on duty.  Whether all the avenues were explored
regarding her ability to pump sufficient milk for her baby is unclear, though
it is apparent some allowances have been made.

What this does is to shine a stark light on the plight of ALL women who would
parent and still hold down a paying job.  The Army is not alone in its
ignorance of the short-and-long term health benefits of breastfeeding--few
employers provide the time or the space for breastfeeding women to pump and
store milk or to have the infant brought in for nursing.  This is in spite of
the proven benefits in minimizing need to use sick leave to care for sick
infants or cost to the employer of use of medical benefits.  The difference
isthat it is not usually a contract breaking issue for a woman to quit her job
or ask for a transfer in civilian life, or to have up to 4 months of unpaid
leave before risking her job status.  (Not that 4 months is adequate, but it
is vastly better than 6 weeks.)

It looks like the Army needs to rethink its contract process, including
sufficient education of the recruit to understand the potential consequences
of what  rights and privileges they may be signing away.  Our culture assumes
reproduction and parenting to be a personal issue, which it is, but given the
age of most recruits, it is hardly surprising that their knowledge of the
consequences and demands on them and their jobs would be lacking, with the
result that they are unable to give "fully informed consent".   (and this
goesfor fathers,too, particularly those married to other military personnel.
After all, it takes two.  ;)   )